Oh boy, here we go again 

rather than providing snippets just for the point of rocking the boat why don't you educate everyone with the four factor test, etc., etc.

Then, let's apply it to real life. 

A textbook manufacturer (of say a history book) cannot profit from the pirating of images for use in their textbooks that are sold to schools (they can use the images under an "editorial license"), however a teacher can make copies of an article to distribute to the class to discuss an issue. 

There is also a distinction with relation to the first factor which specifically states "nonprofit educational purposes" in other words, if Notre Dame University charges their students $10 so they can sit in a common area and watch an NFL football game, it does not necessarily constitute "fair use" since it is for entertainment - not necessarily educational purposes.  If their football coach replayed scenes from the game to teach his "students" how to better play the game, then it very well may fall under fair use laws.

To blatantly say "we can do anything we want"  or "educational institutions are exempt and can, and do, use anything" is like writing a blank check - it isn't true. 

There is a difference and no, they can't do anything they want.

Sharpshot - I sent messages to the folks at iStock, 123RF, and DT.  The last message I sent about this to iStock about copyright misuse was on 9-19-07.  The support ticket is still open if that's any indication of what good it does.

DT is usually pretty good about this - there should be a response within the next 24 hours.

Not sure about 123RF.

I hate to say this but 40 cents per image keyworded is an absolute steal.  Canstock is the other option.

If you want to compare, here's a link to companies that will keyword (or scan images) for you...

http://www.alamy.com/stock-photography-scanner.asp

Honestly, I doubt you'll find anyone to do it cheaper than 40 cents per image.

Good Luck.

I'm not a contributor to Zymmetrical (I already work with 22 agencies that I'm having trouble keeping on top of) but I think this is a venture that may be worth your while and I may sign up within the next couple of months (mostly a function of having time to get established on another site).

Paul has the background to make this succeed - many don't research the people behind an agency and many don't read the TOS an agency puts out to their contributors.  This is something I insist on doing.

If you want to make this a relative comparison - Paul has been doing this for almost 20 years and he's been successful most of the time.  He's worked at Digital Railroad and helped them develop their business, he's built up an agency and sold it to Corbis, he's got a good track record.

Let's look at Fotolia - and the background of their CEO....who is also CURRENTLY CEO of Wixi.com, CURRENTLY CEO of Ziki.com, CURRENTLY CEO of Everyfeed.com and is currently a director of Reachdown Ventures - a venture capitalist firm (nothing to do with photography and no success record with stock agencies).

Let's look at US Photostock - run a by Russian economist who also sells advice on how to get rich quick playing the U.S. stock market (nothing to do with photography and no success record with stock agencies).

I say if you can, give them a chance - it may take some time but it could be worth your while - especially at a 70% commission.

Then you should be OK.  If Alamy hears from a customer that wants exclusive rights, then Member Services will give you a call or contact you via email before licensing the image to the customer to ask if exclusivity is available.  If you can restrict the usage on your other non-exclusive rights managed sites, then all you have to do is just that when (if) Member Services calls you.  You don't need to delete the image (sometimes exclusivity is country/region based so you'll have to update the restrictions at other agencies).

With relation to image deletion, what a lot of folks do is restrict the image first (on a worldwide basis), wait until the next refresh (24 business hours) then they mark it for deletion.  You can't do both at the same time - Member Services has caught on to the trick and both changes won't be saved (the only saved change will be the image is marked for deletion).  If you want your image deleted within 3 months, then change the new "disambiguation" questions to be unfavorable.  Otherwise, you're right, it's 6 months.

Paddy, with all due respect - I get a better commission through a DT, SS, IS, etc. extended license without having exclusive images.  The same license at Shutterstock yields me a $20 commission - they don't require exclusivity and they don't require my images to be of good quality at 55mb (approximately 20mp)

Just about ANY contributor on this forum has the ability to get accepted to the agencies I listed above.  I don't see this as a stepping stone, I see this as a way to reduce the commissions of existing traditional photographers by replacing them with people eager to submit to a "traditional agency".  I'm sorry - but that's what I'm seeing whether the intention is there or not (I'm not trying to bash you).

DG isn't one of the brands that is marketed through Adobe Stock Photos that Jupiter tends to market to - at least the Photodisc deal through iStock is transparent about marketing to Adobe Stock Photos and their recent deal with LuLu.

I understand the importance of building relationships but at what cost?  At least cover my expenses in the deal.  Let's be fair here.  How about 40%?  At 40% I can at least match a Shutterstock extended license if the agency decides to match Getty's recent $50 for web usage deal.  Give us some incentive 

Which distribution channels are you looking for?

Photoshelter is currently offering contributors 70% (80% for images uploaded through November)

Alamy offers it's contributors 65% - 55% if one of their sub-distributors licenses the image - 50% if the image is distributed through the novel use arrangement (similar to this collection)

TSS Photo offers 65% commission

MyLoupe (similar distribution scheme) offers 70-85%

Here's a list of 103 more agencies for your review....

http://www.stockasylum.com/text-pages/findagency.htm


Come on Steve - 15% is good? For a two year exclusive contract on lifestyle shoots that we have to fund and put together?  At a time when traditional photographers are laughing at us because iStock only pays a 20% commission?  Isn't this a step backward?  A lot of us got into the micros as a stepping stone to upload to traditional agencies, and we've encountered road blocks along the way (and continue to).  This is just another reason for "pros" to pick on "amateurs contributing to the micros" - another road block to our success.

Coming from the financial/business perspective of this (my day job), I challenge anyone to try the "float" business model.  It's a great scapegoat for those that don't know the ins and outs, but in all practicality, unless you are doing hundreds of thousands of transactions PER DAY, it isn't worth the money.  This business model is mostly successful in the leasing industry.  The going interest rate is currently between 3 and 4 percent...think about how much money it would take to make the returns lucrative, then subtract the potential transaction fees.

Adelaide - I was with Shutterpoint for a while and I walked away - I think Photoshelter has much more to offer.  I haven't heard the same bad things about Keene images, but if they run it the same way, I would expect Photoshelter to be more successful in the long run.  There are a lot of "big players" (i.e. professional photographers with their livelihoods at stake) backing this agency.

Paul, I'm curious...why would you require someone to compress a file that is already compressed (putting a compressed jpg into a zip file)? 

Just curious.

Thanks for bringing attention to the site.  I'll have to check the place out!

What kind of images are they looking for?  Do they already have models in mind?  Honestly, for a school project, if the models and the concepts and everything else is already lined up (so all I have to do is shoot), then I'd do it in exchange for a model release.  The good shots, I'd upload to traditional agencies.  The mediocre shots, I'd upload to microstock.  I'd exchange the images for property/model releases.

For images already in my portfolio, I'd negotiate on my own.  Why would I want to send them to competition if I could fulfill the need?

Last resort....doesn't matter in the end.  Either, I've already failed to market myself as a photographer or I'm already rolling in the money and don't need the business anyway. 

(sorry, I'm being cynical - I'm not in a position currently where I can turn business, or potential business opportunities away).

Bateleur - I sent Alamy the very same question on Sunday evening (after the new features went up and I tried to start working on it).  I still haven't received a response from member services.  I'm thinking a telephone call if I don't hear from them by Friday.

Please keep us posted and if I hear anything I'll post it as well.

I guess the good news is that in the meantime you can work on your RM images.  Can't work on RP because of the same issue 

Thanks.

Here is the response....

   Images containing people, regardless of whether or not they are recognizable, should not be used in any promotional material without a release. Having an image listed as RF suggests to the customer that it is available for any use so there is a danger that a client could use the image for promotional use.

   To be sure of no legal issues, unreleased images should not be used for any promotional material so should therefore be listed as licensed only.

   The same is also applicable to images containing properties.



Kind Regards,

Luke
Member Services
Alamy

Just got the message.  Uploading will be shut down Friday through Sunday just like it was last week.

Starting this Friday around 5 PM, in order to improve approval times, we need to disable uploading until Monday morning, to give approvers a chance to lower the awaiting image queue.

We did this last week and this should be the last time for a while that we do it.

Sorry for any inconvenience, thanks for your understanding. All in all, this will improve approval times with a smaller queue and we are working hard to make sure we keep the approval times at faster, more optimal levels.

Thanks all.